Editing Impact factor (section)

===Broader negative impact on science===
Just as the impact factor has attracted criticism for various immediate problems associated with its application, so has there also been criticism that its application undermines the broader process of science. Research has indicated that bibliometrics figures, particularly the impact factor, decrease the quality of peer review an article receives,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Stephan |first1=Paula |last2=Veugelers |first2=Reinhilde |last3=Wang |first3=Jian |date=April 2017 |title=Reviewers are blinkered by bibliometrics |journal=Nature |volume=544 |issue=7651 |pages=411–412 |doi=10.1038/544411a |pmid=28447652 |bibcode=2017Natur.544..411S |s2cid=5197138 |issn=0028-0836|doi-access=free }}</ref> cause a reluctance to share data,<ref name=":0" /> decrease the quality of articles,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Informing Research Choices: Indicators and Judgment |url=https://cca-reports.ca/reports/informing-research-choices-indicators-and-judgment/ |access-date=2021-08-16}}</ref> and a reduce the scope of publishable research. "For many researchers the only research questions and projects that appear viable are those that can meet the demand of scoring well in terms of metric performance indicators – and chiefly the journal impact factor."<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, the process of publication and science is slowed down – authors automatically try and publish with the journals with the highest impact factor – "as editors and reviewers are tasked with reviewing papers that are not submitted to the most appropriate venues".<ref name=":2" />